It seems there is to be two versions of Lightroom. The subscription version will be full featured and contain all the new goodies and the purchase and own it version will be a dumbed down version without all the features. Screw Adobe. What a bunch of back stabbing greedy corporate SOB's.All my years of using their products. Who could have imagined they would turn on their customers like this. I'm off to Capture One where I started years ago. I will never buy another Adobe product if I can help it.

It seems there is to be two versions of Lightroom. The subscription version will be full featured and contain all the new goodies and the purchase and own it version will be a dumbed down version without all the features.

Your information is totally false...I can understand being pissed about the Photoshop CC thingie, but it's totally wrong to paint Lightroom with that same brush.

To be honest, it's sad that misinformation and FUD is being spread...look, you do what you want to do...that's your prerogative, but it would be foolish if you base you decision on totally bogus info. You should do yourself a favor and be sure what you THINK you know is actually true.

And yes, what you stated is totally bogus...now, re factor your decisions.

What assurances can our readers have that Lightroom will not become a subscription-only option?

[Bryan O'Neil Hughes] Lightroom is for photographers. And the Lightroom team is very aware of the reaction by photographers to Photoshop CC. We don't have plans to make Lightroom a subscription-only option but we do envision added functionality for the CC version of Lightroom.

[Bryan O'Neil Hughes] Lightroom is for photographers. And the Lightroom team is very aware of the reaction by photographers to Photoshop CC. We don't have plans to make Lightroom a subscription-only option but we do envision added functionality for the CC version of Lightroom.

Added functionality related to being able to be able to sync to "the cloud" and see images on all your devices is what Bryan was talking about (note Bryan doesn't work on Lightroom, he works on Photoshop). Bryan was not talking about core DAM or image processing features being added to a cloud version that won't be on the perpetual license version.

Do you have multiple devices you want to send your images, image settings to? This would be a type of cloud based feature that wouldn't work without a cloud service...

Do you have multiple devices you want to send your images, image settings to? This would be a type of cloud based feature that wouldn't work without a cloud service...

Why do I need the cloud to use the LR catalog in my desktop computer from my tablet or phone?

I just realised that there are two different cloud services being referred to here.

Jeff, I suspect that you are referring to "Cloud Storage", where you can access your images from anywhere that there is an Internet connection.

What Adobe are looking to sell with the iPad version of LR that uses a cloud is "Cloud Compute" (which may or may not also have "Cloud Stoage.")

Or at least that is how I understand what has been talked about.

If I use Amazon's Cloud Drive today for storage, yes it will be slower than local disk but it will give me Internet backups of files, even a LR catalogue. In terms of access speeds, Adobe's cloud is unlikely to be any faster than Amazon's for reading/writing files. But more importantly, I don't need a special version of LR to use Amazon Cloud. Ultimately, the same data needs to be sent to/from the cloud so an Adobe Storage Cloud will not have anything special to offer there.

However given what I've seen of how LR uses cache directories locally on computers, it needs a few extra smarts to work effectively with cloud based storage services.

From all I have read, there is no cloud computing nor mandatory cloud storage involved with Adobe's "Creative Cloud"; even the iPad demo was doing all the raw image processing on the iPad itself. AFAIK, all that Creative Cloud provides is some _options_ for syncing of data and storing and sharing of files.

As the the Adobe VP's comment that

Quote

We don't have plans to make Lightroom a subscription-only option but we do envision added functionality for the CC version of Lightroom.

I am inclined to believe Jeff Schewe's innocuous interpretation, but with the current PR disaster reaching "Netflix" proportions in the anger, misinterpretations, and loss of trust, Adobe representatives should become a lot more careful in their choice of words!

Added functionality related to being able to be able to sync to "the cloud" and see images on all your devices is what Bryan was talking about (note Bryan doesn't work on Lightroom, he works on Photoshop). Bryan was not talking about core DAM or image processing features being added to a cloud version that won't be on the perpetual license version.

Do you have multiple devices you want to send your images, image settings to? This would be a type of cloud based feature that wouldn't work without a cloud service...

That is a little reassuring. Even so, it would be useful to have some clarification directly from Adobe. Added functionality could indeed simply refer to items directly related to the cloud. Without some clarification from Adobe, it could equally refer to a CC version of LR that has enhanced DAM or editing features. The statement isn't definitive without clarification from the company.

That is a little reassuring. Even so, it would be useful to have some clarification directly from Adobe. Added functionality could indeed simply refer to items directly related to the cloud. Without some clarification from Adobe, it could equally refer to a CC version of LR that has enhanced DAM or editing features. The statement isn't definitive without clarification from the company.

LR5 hasn't shipped yet and any cloud features are down the road. So at this point it's all speculation-even from Adobe as it relates to LR5 and future versions.

LR5 hasn't shipped yet and any cloud features are down the road. So at this point it's all speculation-even from Adobe as it relates to LR5 and future versions.

Fair enough. Makes sense. Thanks.

It would be better for customers, and therefore Adobe, if they could be a bit clearer, especially given the statement in that interview. Adobe clearly have a product strategy. That's good. A strategy to clearly communicate the changes would help; that unclear statement caused unnecessary confusion.

Perhaps the good people at Adobe should prepare an event like this a little better? You know, let the Photoshop people talk to the Lightroom people and all of them talk to the people with their head up in the cloud, make some nice phrases and assurances so as to avoid annoying their customers any more than necessary?

Added functionality related to being able to be able to sync to "the cloud" and see images on all your devices is what Bryan was talking about (note Bryan doesn't work on Lightroom, he works on Photoshop). Bryan was not talking about core DAM or image processing features being added to a cloud version that won't be on the perpetual license version..

Jeff: I am a great fan of yours, purchased your last book as well as the videos. However, in the "DPReview" interview with Adobe VP of Creative Solutions, Winston Hendrickson and Bryan O'Neill Hughes, Mr. Hendrickson said "We expected a higher degree of this type of reaction from the hobbyist photographic community because currently there's not a lot of photography-specific value in our subscription products. That's why we've taken the unusual steps of Tom Hogarty's appearance on The Grid [a Scott Kelby webisode] showing potential Lightroom CC features and the Photoshop Sneak Peek where we showed new features like Camera Shake reduction."

From Mr. Hendrickson's comment, I take it that there is more planned for Lightroom CC than just cloud processing. Further I cannot believe that Adobe will include features in LR that are in the Photoshop ACR/CC. They want their subscription money and as Mr. Hendrickson says "there is not a lot of value" to this community.....There may not be too many takers for your LR5 video.....

I won't be hasty until all the facts are out, but I'm NOT a fan of cloud based anything, including storage of my raw files OR having to use software based on it. Wrongly or rightly I like MY things where I can put my hands on it if need be, and not under any sort of control from a third party. I know quite a few people, including photographers, that feel the same way. I'm certainly not saying the people that would choose to participate in something like this are wrong, but it is not my philosophy. I hate to say it because I've used Lr since ver. 1 and haven't ever seriously looked in another direction, since its inception. If I were forced to operate in the "cloud" in any way.. I would seriously have to look at other options.

**EDIT: It might be advantageous for those interested in operating via the cloud to have that option, but if the folks from Adobe are paying attention.. please consider carefully before removing the ability for users to keep everything local and outside of a subscription service. My suspicion is you will find the "newest, latest, and greatest" might not work so well for you from a customer satisfaction standpoint. Make your product the best available, raise prices if you must.. but don't force your customer base into a this way or the highway decision.

Q. Will there be features of Lightroom 5 that are exclusive to Creative Cloud members?

A. No.

Hi Eric,

I really appreciate your involvement in shaping the future for Adobe (as far as a single individual can), and your participation in various theads here at LuLa.

However, from the "unusual steps of Tom Hogarty's appearance on The Grid [a Scott Kelby webisode]" that I saw via DPReview, I got the distinct impression that some of the future features are specific to the availability of a wireless tablet connection, and exclusive to Lightroom CC version subscribers. Which made sense for that limited (although increasing) fragment of photographic output.

I wouldn't be sad to be corrected if my interpretation was not correct.

I read Tom Hogarty's comments, and I don't doubt them, but they're about LR5.

My concerns are a longer term. When CC was launched, there was no mention of it becoming "compulsory"; users could choose a subscription or perpetual-licence model. Then, bang! Having lost the ability to upgrade 3 versions ago, then CS disappears altogether, and for single-product users the price goes up markedly (50% for those that upgrade each time, over 500% for those that used to upgrade every 3 releases).

LR5 will be a stand-alone, perpetual licence product, I trust you! But what about LR6? LR7?

Should I really be making a long-term commitment to LR, and then find in 18 months time that LR6 is CC only (and more expensive)? If that's in doubt, I want to start planning my exit strategy now.

I do believe what you and Tom are saying, but my trust in Adobe has taken a real knock over this.

Simon I think you already know the answer to that question. No one at Adobe is talking about LR6. Adobe has proven that its all about the money.....not exactly a socially responsible company. Kind of like garment factories in Bangledesh! By the way, Disney will no longer allow its products to be made in non socially responsible factories period, and Adobe's customers will no longer care to do business with it also.

I read Tom Hogarty's comments, and I don't doubt them, but they're about LR5.

My concerns are a longer term. When CC was launched, there was no mention of it becoming "compulsory"; users could choose a subscription or perpetual-licence model. Then, bang! Having lost the ability to upgrade 3 versions ago, then CS disappears altogether, and for single-product users the price goes up markedly (50% for those that upgrade each time, over 500% for those that used to upgrade every 3 releases).

LR5 will be a stand-alone, perpetual licence product, I trust you! But what about LR6? LR7?

Should I really be making a long-term commitment to LR, and then find in 18 months time that LR6 is CC only (and more expensive)? If that's in doubt, I want to start planning my exit strategy now.

I do believe what you and Tom are saying, but my trust in Adobe has taken a real knock over this.

I've been a PS user for over 15 years.As LR capabilities have evolved I've found myself using PS less frequently. I decided not to upgrade to the latest version of PS choosing to abandon using it. I'm glad I did that.

The CS cloud tools look to be excellent but are far too expensive for me to consider. If/when LR moves to a cloud only subscription basis I'll find other tools. I won't be happy to abandon Adobe products all together but subscription only as it is currently configured is far too expensive to be a value proposition for me. CS in the cloud only and the way it is being communicated, implemented and priced does nothing to give me any sense of confidence in Adobe as a business.

The ungraceful manner in which they have announced/implemented/priced the move to the cloud leads me to believe that I'm not important to them as a customer. Caveat emptor.

I read Tom Hogarty's comments, and I don't doubt them, but they're about LR5.

My concerns are a longer term. When CC was launched, there was no mention of it becoming "compulsory"; users could choose a subscription or perpetual-licence model. Then, bang! Having lost the ability to upgrade 3 versions ago, then CS disappears altogether, and for single-product users the price goes up markedly (50% for those that upgrade each time, over 500% for those that used to upgrade every 3 releases).

LR5 will be a stand-alone, perpetual licence product, I trust you! But what about LR6? LR7?

Should I really be making a long-term commitment to LR, and then find in 18 months time that LR6 is CC only (and more expensive)? If that's in doubt, I want to start planning my exit strategy now.

I do believe what you and Tom are saying, but my trust in Adobe has taken a real knock over this.

and why do you ask Eric - he is a technical person and not a manager/marketing, isn't he... and there is no doubt that LR6 will be only subscription based too, it just happened that LR5 was a little ahead and Adobe wanted to try the full switch on simply lesser amount of CS users